Skip to comments.Michael Voris Discusses Mormonism and Protestantism
Posted on 10/26/2011 9:32:38 PM PDT by rzman21
Michael Voris of RealCatholic TV discusses Mormonism and Protestantism: http://www.youtube.com/user/RealCatholicTV#p/search/0/zQZBukPUwAA
“Ill ask again: how so?”
Well, my friend, if you cannot discern the lack of ethics yourself, I will not be able to help you.
One more thing, a direct quotation of Michael Voris from the video - even printed on the screen so one cannot miss it. According to Voris Martin Luther said that anyone had the right to read the Bible and take it “to mean whatever they wanted it to mean.”
That, sir, is a lie ... and that makes Michael Voris a liar. If you want to support such activity, that is your business.
Well gee, that seems like a pretty unethical way of admitting you can't give a cogent, much less testable, answer, but I guess that's your prerogative when the only one you have to convince is yourself.
One more thing, a direct quotation of Michael Voris from the video - even printed on the screen so one cannot miss it. According to Voris Martin Luther said that anyone had the right to read the Bible and take it to mean whatever they wanted it to mean.
That, sir, is a lie ...
No, that's a paraphrase in the context of a commentary. And it's a commentary from a theological critic, so if you're looking for candy coating on that gnat you want to gagging on, you're going to have to look further.
The only people who take "pro-choice" folks seriously when they start wailing over being called "pro-abortion" are other people who are pro-abortion.
That doesn't turn those who will not abide by their conceit into liars.
“That certain Protestants get hot under that collar when the facts are pointed out does nothing to impeach those facts. Id be more impressed with their protestations if they would fairly answer the questions we have been posing to them for years instead of turning into vicious snapping dogs when they find themselves theologically challenged by biblically knowledgable Catholics.”
“Hot under the collar”? Oh, I don’t think so. Tired of the calumny? Pretty much. I don’t know if that makes me one of your “vicious snapping dogs.” I’ll let you be the arbiter of such pronouncements.
Finally, I can’t speak for the Protestants - I doubt anyone could. I can only speak for Lutherans - who don’t consider themselves Protestants (a pejorative term affixed to all who disagree with them by the church of Rome - but then you probably know that). Lutherans put out the Augsburg Confession in 1530 in order to get the church to examine itself in the light of God’s Word. The response was, as I’m sure you know, the Confutation. The Confutation was answered by the Lutherans with the Apology (Defense) of the Augsburg Confession in 1531. As the Lutherans did these things it was their heads on the block, as Rome had already made crystal clear. (Funny how the church, to whom our Lord and His apostles forbade use of the sword, was made to feel perfectly justified to use it when it suited the powers that be in Rome ... but that’s another chapter).
To make a long story short, the Lutheran asked repeatedly for a church council amid a fair amount of foot-dragging on the part of Rome. Finally, one was convened in Trent in 1545, which again I’m sure you know. There, among other things, justification by grace through faith for the sake of Jesus Christ was anathematized. That is to say, it was declared by the assembled prelates (though not unanimously) that anyone who so teaches, confesses or believes is going to hell.
The entire content of Trent was answered, for the Lutherans, by Martin Chemnitz. The book, originally written in Latin, of course, is available in English as “Examination of the Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent.” It is in four volumes, available from Concordia Publishing House. So, sir, the Lutherans have fairly answered biblically knowledgeable Catholics more than once (and many more examples could be given, but these are the chief ones).
I don’t imagine you will trouble yourself with reading such things - although perhaps you will surprise and amaze me - but there they are nonetheless.
A pleasant day to you, sir.
Gee, do you feel vindicated now that you've substituted both the audience and the context of my statement for a more you-friendly recitation of history?
Tell you what, lets start over and just discuss faith and practice as it exists today....whaddaya say?
DAMN them Protestants!!
Just what VITAL teachings, and rituals, and essential things disappeared when that happened?
You’re kidding; right?
When He returns; will He find any?
Still stuck at 47 posts ... bummer. Looks like no one is interested in a fight.
No one’s going to be interested in a fight that seems designed to accept Mormonism as Christian in any way. An argument against a Mormon is completely different from an intra-Christian debate — especially with those who share in orthodoxy in terms of our belief in our Lord, God and SAvior Jesus Christ, the Trinity, Nicene Creed and Sacraments
Well, Cronos, I for one have no interest in a fight designed to lump those who are clearly Christian in their confession together with those who by theirs are not. Nor am I interested in a fight about whose organization is superior ... how utterly pointless. I am interested in faithfulness to Christ, the one and only Lord of the Church and Savior of the world. I know that we two do not agree on all things (but we do on the creeds, all three of them), but I have never doubted your conviction that Christ is Lord and Savior and that in Him alone is salvation, and that, further, those who are His by faith are just that.
I guess it’s a draw then.
Let’s move on to other pursuits.
What an utterly fatuous question!
Why do you think Luther deleted them, and left in things like geneologies?
You answer MY question first; THEN I will wonder about just what was going thru Luther's mind.
Now answer my question.
ping to you theo, for the files.